Shane Sibbel

Acted unled for the Second Respondent in relation to an appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council concerning the lawfulness of administration orders obtained in Mauritius against the background of an international commercial dispute between the Government of India and a number of U.S. investors in satellite technology. Permission to appeal was refused with costs.

Complex commercial dispute between members of a Saudi family involving allegations of unlawful means conspiracy, against the sensitive and politicised background of the Claimant’s flight from Saudi Arabia and the grant of asylum to her in Canada. Shane has appeared in a number of interlocutory hearings (led and unled), including in relation to strike out and the terms of a confidentiality regime [2024] EWHC 266 (Comm), the hearing of unsuccessful Part 11 jurisdiction challenges brought by the Defendants [2024] EWHC 673 (Comm) and a disclosure application resulting in important guidance on CPR PD 57AD paras 14 and 18 [2025] EWHC 2608 (Comm). A 20 day trial is scheduled for 2026.

Acting with Andrew Hunter KC and a local counsel team for the Claimant in consolidated proceedings concerning an alleged unlawful means conspiracy whereby the Defendants (comprising a former Minister, former officers at the Claimant, and a number of contractors) allegedly colluded to rig procurement bids for the construction and upgrading of various major roads in Trinidad.

Shane is advising a number of bondholders unled in relation to claims worth c. US$200m in relation to two bond issues in India involving underlying allegations of fraud, false accounting and asset stripping across a number of jurisdictions.

Claim worth over US$700million brought by a Chinese consortium in connection with the purchase of a majority shareholding in an international sports rights business, which subsequently became insolvent. The Claimant alleges that its entry into the SPA was induced by fraud. Shane acted through the pleadings and disclosure phase (with Andrew Hunter KC and Barnaby Lowe) for the First and Tenth Defendants. Shane appeared successfully and unled at a hearing on the application of privilege to company email accounts: [2022] EWHC 2856 (Comm).

The claimant members of the Vale mining group brought a claim in fraud for c.US$2 billion, relating to a joint venture for the mining of iron ore in the Republic of Guinea. Shane (led by Robert Weekes KC) acted for the second defendant. A 9-week trial in the Commercial Court commenced in late January 2022. In the fourth week of trial the claimants withdrew all of the claims and agreed to pay the defendants' costs on the indemnity basis. The second defendant then successfully pursued claims against the claimants under a cross-undertaking in damanges provided as part of a WFO.

Shane is sole counsel for three defendants in a commercial fraud dispute in the Commercial Court concerning the sale of property in a Thai luxury resort and political guarantees relating to the death of the King of Thailand. Shane has advised on Part 11 and strike out applications and on strategy more generally, including on issues relating to applicable law, the pleading of allegations of fraud and forum principles.

Sole counsel for the claimant in a complex joint venture dispute concerning the alleged appropriation by the defendant of shares in several companies and an ongoing dilution and restructuring strategy to exclude the claimant from the companies' businesses. The case raises a variety of issues in relation to fiduciary duties and constructive trusts. The claimant succeeded at first instance and was awarded his costs on the indemnity basis. The defendant's appeal was unsuccessful save in respect of the framing of injunctive relief, with all of the claimant's substantive claims to interests in the companies upheld by a judgment of Sir Anthony Mann. Permission for a second appeal to the Court of Appeal was refused. Enforcement proceedings continue.

Acted for the Claimants in a US$1-2 billion claim for fraud, breach of contract and unlawful means conspiracy involving sixteen defendants and proceedings (substantive and injunctive) across a number of jurisdictions. The First Claimant is a Thai entrepreneur and political refugee, who fled Thailand upon being charged with lèse-majesté (“offending the dignity of the King”). The claim alleges a fraudulent conspiracy to deprive the claims of a majority interest in the leading renewable energy corporation in Thailand. 

An important decision of Butcher J in the proceedings clarified (i) the correct approach to costs where a claimant pleads a claim governed by foreign law in reliance upon the default rule in Dicey 25(2), accepting the Claimants' analysis of the recent Court of Appeal decision in FS Cairo v Brownlie [2020] EWCA Civ 996; and (ii) the scope of the Court's discretion to grant relief under s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 in a case involving foreign elements (dismissing a strike out application brought by D10).

Shane acted as junior Counsel along with Victoria Windle and Andrew Trotter, led by Anthony Peto KC.

Shane was instructed on behalf of the First and Seventh Defendants in English declaratory proceedings concerning the disputed restructuring of 1.1 billion euros of debt by (inter alia) the Claimant and its ultimate owners and controllers. The wider dispute encompasses related fraud and insolvency proceedings in New York, Luxembourg and Germany.

Acted for all six defendants in a substantial claim concerning various alleged agreements between Ukranian oligarchs relating to (amongst other things) a large scale logistics development project in, and around, the port of Odessa, Ukraine. D4 to D6 successfully challenged jurisdiction, and the remainder of the claims were either struck out or withdrawn (led by Brian Kennelly KC).

Shane was instructed as junior counsel (led by Tom de la Mare KC and Ben Jaffey KC) to advise and draft proceedings in relation to two sets of claims relating to the alleged use of multiple types of "defeat devices" in the emissions control systems employed by a number of well known car manufacturers, and (in one case) an alleged technology-suppression cartel. 

Instructed for the potential Defendants in connection with a threatened claim for US$717 million alleging breach of contract, partnership, fiduciary and director duties, in connection with the development of an operating system for electrical drivetrains and other electric vehicles (led by Andrew Hunter KC).

Dispute between Ocado and one of its co-founders who has established a rival company, allegedly in breach of confidence, and who now counterclaim for (amongst other things) unlawful means conspiracy against Ocado plc, causing the loss of a contract with Waitrose worth hundreds of millions. In addition to their counterclaim, the Defendants issued an application to discharge search orders said to have been obtained by abuse of process, material non-disclosure and unfair presentation of evidence. Junior counsel for the Defendants (as part of a team with Anthony Peto KC and Daniel Burgess).

Advised a former NatWest trader in relation to a contested application for examination under s2 of the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 in aid of a New York class action concerning the manipulation of the $5tn-per-day international forex market brought against 16 international banks (15 of which settled for >$2.3 bn). 

Acted successfully for the U.S. Plaintiffs in proceedings concerning the fraudulent mis-selling of debt securities worth US$76 million in BTA Bank JSC in the course of restructuring the bank following the well-publicised Ablyazov fraud. Acted for the Plaintiffs in successfully obtaining contested orders for the deposition in England of material witnesses, under s.2 of the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 (led by Andrew Hunter KC). 

Claim concerning the temporal scope and content of a facultative reinsurance policy between the claimant and defendant, in the aftermath of an offshore construction disaster causing losses of c.$550 million. The case raised complex questions relating to the objective meaning of a reinsurance policy as applied to unexpected factual circumstances. Led by Gavin Kealey KC at the main hearing, and appeared unled at the consequential hearing, where Shane successfully obtained permission to appeal from the first instance judge.

Appeared successfully as sole counsel for the Claimant in the Court of Appeal. The appeal concerned important preliminary issues in respect of the scope of the Pallant v Morgan constructive trust, proprietary estoppel and joint venture fiduciary duties. Permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was refused.

Challenge under sections 67 and 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, in litigation concerning loans made by Standard Bank to a third party Mongolian corporation and the alleged fraudulent misappropriation and dissipation of the loaned monies. Multiple applications concerning security for sums awarded under section 70(7) of the 1996 Act and worldwide disclosure. The case concerned (amongst other things) the correct merits threshold to be applied in s.70(7) applications in cases (1) involving fraud and (2) involving a challenge to arbitrators’ jurisdiction.

Junior counsel for the Defendant (as part of a team including Robert Weekes KC).

High profile proceedings arising out of two capital raisings by Barclays Bank in 2008.

Acted successfully as junior counsel for John Varley, ex-CEO of Barclays Bank (led by Javan Herberg KC) on applications to stay the deceit claims brought by PCP against Barclays in connection with the Bank’s capital raising exercises during the height of the credit crunch. The Court held that the claim should not be listed to be heard until October 2019, to enable criminal charges brought by the SFO in respect of the Qatar subscriptions (with which it held there was a substantial overlap) to be heard first.  The case is a significant example of a civil court being prepared to stay a substantial trial to permit criminal proceedings to take precedence, on the grounds of possible jury contamination.

Acted unled for the Second Respondent in relation to an appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council concerning the lawfulness of administration orders obtained in Mauritius against the background of an international commercial dispute between the Government of India and a number of U.S. investors in satellite technology. Permission to appeal was refused with costs.

Acting with Andrew Hunter KC and a local counsel team for the Claimant in consolidated proceedings concerning an alleged unlawful means conspiracy whereby the Defendants (comprising a former Minister, former officers at the Claimant, and a number of contractors) allegedly colluded to rig procurement bids for the construction and upgrading of various major roads in Trinidad.

Complex commercial dispute between members of a Saudi family involving allegations of unlawful means conspiracy, against the sensitive and politicised background of the Claimant’s flight from Saudi Arabia and the grant of asylum to her in Canada. Shane has appeared in a number of interlocutory hearings (led and unled), including in relation to strike out and the terms of a confidentiality regime [2024] EWHC 266 (Comm), the hearing of unsuccessful Part 11 jurisdiction challenges brought by the Defendants [2024] EWHC 673 (Comm) and a disclosure application resulting in important guidance on CPR PD 57AD paras 14 and 18 [2025] EWHC 2608 (Comm). A 20 day trial is scheduled for 2026.

Shane is advising a number of bondholders unled in relation to claims worth c. US$200m in relation to two bond issues in India involving underlying allegations of fraud, false accounting and asset stripping across a number of jurisdictions.

Claim worth over US$700million brought by a Chinese consortium in connection with the purchase of a majority shareholding in an international sports rights business, which subsequently became insolvent. The Claimant alleges that its entry into the SPA was induced by fraud. Shane acted through the pleadings and disclosure phase (with Andrew Hunter KC and Barnaby Lowe) for the First and Tenth Defendants. Shane appeared successfully and unled at a hearing on the application of privilege to company email accounts: [2022] EWHC 2856 (Comm).

The claimant members of the Vale mining group brought a claim in fraud for c.US$2 billion, relating to a joint venture for the mining of iron ore in the Republic of Guinea. Shane (led by Robert Weekes KC) acted for the second defendant. A 9-week trial in the Commercial Court commenced in late January 2022. In the fourth week of trial the claimants withdrew all of the claims and agreed to pay the defendants' costs on the indemnity basis. The second defendant then successfully pursued claims against the claimants under a cross-undertaking in damanges provided as part of a WFO.

Acted for the Respondents in a commercial arbitration with its seat in Ireland concerning the EUR 320 million refinancing of an Irish Collective Asset-Management Vehicle and its impact upon bonus provisions within an asset management agreement.

Sole counsel for the claimant in a complex joint venture dispute concerning the alleged appropriation by the defendant of shares in several companies and an ongoing dilution and restructuring strategy to exclude the claimant from the companies' businesses. The case raises a variety of issues in relation to fiduciary duties and constructive trusts. The claimant succeeded at first instance and was awarded his costs on the indemnity basis. The defendant's appeal was unsuccessful save in respect of the framing of injunctive relief, with all of the claimant's substantive claims to interests in the companies upheld by a judgment of Sir Anthony Mann. Permission for a second appeal to the Court of Appeal was refused. Enforcement proceedings continue.

Shane is sole counsel for three defendants in a commercial fraud dispute in the Commercial Court concerning the sale of property in a Thai luxury resort and political guarantees relating to the death of the King of Thailand. Shane has advised on Part 11 and strike out applications and on strategy more generally, including on issues relating to applicable law, the pleading of allegations of fraud and forum principles.

Acted for the Claimants in a US$1-2 billion claim for fraud, breach of contract and unlawful means conspiracy involving sixteen defendants and proceedings (substantive and injunctive) across a number of jurisdictions. The First Claimant is a Thai entrepreneur and political refugee, who fled Thailand upon being charged with lèse-majesté (“offending the dignity of the King”). The claim alleges a fraudulent conspiracy to deprive the claims of a majority interest in the leading renewable energy corporation in Thailand. 

An important decision of Butcher J in the proceedings clarified (i) the correct approach to costs where a claimant pleads a claim governed by foreign law in reliance upon the default rule in Dicey 25(2), accepting the Claimants' analysis of the recent Court of Appeal decision in FS Cairo v Brownlie [2020] EWCA Civ 996; and (ii) the scope of the Court's discretion to grant relief under s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 in a case involving foreign elements (dismissing a strike out application brought by D10).

Shane acted as junior Counsel along with Victoria Windle and Andrew Trotter, led by Anthony Peto KC.

Acted for all six defendants in a substantial claim concerning various alleged agreements between Ukranian oligarchs relating to (amongst other things) a large scale logistics development project in, and around, the port of Odessa, Ukraine. D4 to D6 successfully challenged jurisdiction, and the remainder of the claims were either struck out or withdrawn (led by Brian Kennelly KC).

Dispute between Ocado and one of its co-founders who has established a rival company, allegedly in breach of confidence, and who now counterclaim for (amongst other things) unlawful means conspiracy against Ocado plc, causing the loss of a contract with Waitrose worth hundreds of millions. In addition to their counterclaim, the Defendants issued an application to discharge search orders said to have been obtained by abuse of process, material non-disclosure and unfair presentation of evidence. Junior counsel for the Defendants (as part of a team with Anthony Peto KC and Daniel Burgess).

Acted successfully for the U.S. Plaintiffs in proceedings concerning the fraudulent mis-selling of debt securities worth US$76 million in BTA Bank JSC in the course of restructuring the bank following the well-publicised Ablyazov fraud. Acted for the Plaintiffs in successfully obtaining contested orders for the deposition in England of material witnesses, under s.2 of the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 (led by Andrew Hunter KC). 

Advised a former NatWest trader in relation to a contested application for examination under s2 of the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 in aid of a New York class action concerning the manipulation of the $5tn-per-day international forex market brought against 16 international banks (15 of which settled for >$2.3 bn). 

Appeared successfully as sole counsel for the Claimant in the Court of Appeal. The appeal concerned important preliminary issues in respect of the scope of the Pallant v Morgan constructive trust, proprietary estoppel and joint venture fiduciary duties. Permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was refused.

High profile proceedings arising out of two capital raisings by Barclays Bank in 2008.

Acted successfully as junior counsel for John Varley, ex-CEO of Barclays Bank (led by Javan Herberg KC) on applications to stay the deceit claims brought by PCP against Barclays in connection with the Bank’s capital raising exercises during the height of the credit crunch. The Court held that the claim should not be listed to be heard until October 2019, to enable criminal charges brought by the SFO in respect of the Qatar subscriptions (with which it held there was a substantial overlap) to be heard first.  The case is a significant example of a civil court being prepared to stay a substantial trial to permit criminal proceedings to take precedence, on the grounds of possible jury contamination.

Acted unled for the Second Respondent in relation to an appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council concerning the lawfulness of administration orders obtained in Mauritius against the background of an international commercial dispute between the Government of India and a number of U.S. investors in satellite technology. Permission to appeal was refused with costs.

Acting for the Defendant in a claim under s.45 of the Arbitration Act 1996 relating to an Investment Treaty Arbitration worth c. $1.5 billion with its seat in England. The claim seeks a ruling on a question of law relating to the authority of an administrator of foreign companies and the recognition of such authority in the arbitration.

Acted for the Respondents in a commercial arbitration with its seat in Ireland concerning the EUR 320 million refinancing of an Irish Collective Asset-Management Vehicle and its impact upon bonus provisions within an asset management agreement.

Acting for the Claimants in an LCIA arbitration claim for the recovery of c.£20 million in connection with a restructured debt secured by various property developments and gas peaking projects. 17 preliminary issues were bifurcated for a Phase 1 trial in January 2023. Shane appeared unled against a KC at an interim hearing on the admissibility and relevance of the Respondents’ evidence for the Phase 1 hearing. He did c.40% of the advocacy at the Phase 1 trial and the advocacy on consequential matters thereafter following the Claimant’s success on all but one of the relevant issues. Shane is instructed to appear unled for the Claimant at a 3-4 week trial of the remaining allegations in April 2026.

Instructed as sole counsel for the Defendant in an LCIA Arbitration concerning a contractual dispute arising out of a framework agreement for the international sale of goods. 

Claims under alleged guarantees for loan facilities. The principal sum claimed was approximately $70m. Junior counsel for the First Respondent, a major mining company and one of the largest producers of copper in the world, which alleged it was the victim of a complex fraud involving forgery.  

The matter involved 18 separate procedural disputes, and a trial split into four stages over a period of 6 months in 2015 and 2016, with further hearings in 2017.

Appeared successfully as sole counsel for Oscar Piastri in a well-publicised CRB arbitration involving McLaren and Renault concerning the status of that driver's contract for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 F1 seasons. 

Substantial contractual claim against a sports commercial rights holder in relation to the correct distribution of revenues, under a series of inter-related agreements, between participants in a top-flight international sporting competition (led by Andrew Hunter KC). The claim settled shortly before trial in October 2020.

Shane was instructed to advise the FA in relation to an arbitration claim challenging the lawfulness of UEFA's ban on Russian football teams participating in certain competitions following the Russian invasion of Ukraine (led by Adam Lewis KC).

Challenge under sections 67 and 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, in litigation concerning loans made by Standard Bank to a third party Mongolian corporation and the alleged fraudulent misappropriation and dissipation of the loaned monies. Multiple applications concerning security for sums awarded under section 70(7) of the 1996 Act and worldwide disclosure. The case concerned (amongst other things) the correct merits threshold to be applied in s.70(7) applications in cases (1) involving fraud and (2) involving a challenge to arbitrators’ jurisdiction.

Junior counsel for the Defendant (as part of a team including Robert Weekes KC).

Advised PCB in relation to their arbitration claim against the BCCI for breach of contract in relation to international cricket fixtures (junior counsel to Lord Pannick KC).

Junior Counsel for the FA (led by Christopher Coltart KC)

Rule K arbitration concerning the sanctioning of a club owner for acting contrary to Rule E3 in relation to the transfer of a footballer.

The Tribunal upheld the finding of liability and imposed a suspension from footballing activity of 12 months (and fine of 100,000) upon Mr Cellino.   

Shane recently appeared in an important Court of Appeal case concerning the scope of Article 8 ECHR in family reunification cases and its extra-territorial application where part of the relevant family is in a conflict zone (led by Sir James Eadie KC).

Judicial review proceedings in which the Claimant challenged (i) the refusal of the Director of Legal Aid Casework to grant her legal aid in relation to proceedings before an independent review panel concerning the exclusion of her child from school and (ii) the Lord Chancellor's Exceptional Case Funding Guidance. Following a two day rolled up hearing in May 2024, the claims were dismissed. Shane appeared unled for the Lord Chancellor.

Advised the Home Office, Foreign Office and Treasury in connection with asset seizure and the war in Ukraine (led by Sir James Eadie KC). 

Important constitutional case on the principle that a court order must be obeyed until and unless it is set aside or varied by the Court, or overruled by legislation, regardless of whether the order is valid, invalid, regular, irregular, or made by a court of limited or unlimited jurisdiction. Shane appeared pro bono with Raza Husain KC and Laura Dubinsky KC for Bail for Immigration Detainees (intervening). 

Shane was instructed by the Secretary of State for Justice, and HMPPS, as part of a core counsel team, led by Sir James Eadie KC, to advise in relation to a variety of legal issues and potential challenges arising out of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic upon the prison service. 

In that role he has worked on (amongst other things): 

- a potential systems challenge by the Howard League for Penal Reform to the policies of HMPPS regarding the release of prisoners during the pandemic (the challenge was not issued);

- Advising HMPPS generally as to its response to the pandemic;

- R (ex p Davis) v SSJ (CO/1389/2020): a claim seeking the immediate release of a prisoner for Covid-19 related health reasons during (the claim was withdrawn);

- R (ex p Jalil) v SSJ (CO/515/2020): a claim which sought (inter alia) to challenge the approach of the SSJ to the prisoner's transfer to open conditions during the pandemic; and

- Pre-action correspondence in response to a number of further individual challenges to decisions not to release prisoners and/or to the conditions of their detention. 

Appeal concerning the correct approach to determining the "reasonableness" of an internal flight alternative / internal relocation alternative under the test prescribed in AH (Sudan) v SSHD [2008] 1 AC 678 and Januzi v SSHD [2006] 2 AC 426, and in particular the extent to which the question is to be determined by comparison with the conditions of a "significant minority" in the country concerned. Acted for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (intervening) (led by Michael Fordham KC).

Appeal concerning the compatibility of the country guidance in MN (Ahmadis: Country Conditions: Risk: Pakistan) [2012] UKUT 389 (IAC) with the principle in HJ (Iran) v SSHD [2010] UKSC 31, and the responsibility of tribunals to apply that principle to their factual findings, irrespective of the positive case advanced by the applicant. Acted for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (led by Michael Fordham KC, with Gayatri Sarathi), which intervened in support of the successful appellant.

Successfully opposed two expedited appeals to the Supreme Court raising challenges under Article 14 ECHR (taken with Article 8 and/or Article 1 Protocol 1) to the benefit cap legislation. The appeals also raised issues under common law and Article 3(1) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Junior counsel for the Secretary of State (as part of a team including Simon Pritchard).

Supreme Court appeal concerning (i) the jurisdiction of immigration tribunals to make factual findings in relation to an individual's human trafficking history, in the course of determining the lawfulness of removal and (ii) the scope and content of positive obligations owed under Article 4 ECHR in human trafficking cases, again in the context of assessing removal decisions. Junior counsel for ECPAT UK (intervening), led by Raza Husain KC.  

Appeal to the Supreme Court, in a sequel to the decisions in HJ (Iran) [2011] 1 AC 596 and RT (Zimbabwe) [2013] 1 AC 152. The appeal concerned a refusal of asylum on the expectation that an individual would suppress the expression of their religious faith, where the state criminalised the reasonable expression of that identity. Junior counsel for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (led by Michael Fordham KC).

Civil claims against the security services, the former foreign secretary and others alleging their complicity in rendition and torture. In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court concluded that the claims could proceed to trial, dismissing the Defendants' assertions that the claims were barred by state immunity and/or the doctrine of foreign act of state. Junior counsel with Ravi Mehta for the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and the UN Chair-Rapporteur on Arbitrary Detention (in their first intervention in UK proceedings).

Shane is acting for the Secretary of State unled on a challenge to the Generic Parole Process Policy Framework and to a decision not to refer a pre-tariff indeterminate sentence prisonner to the Parole Board for the purposes of considering a transfer to open conditions. The case concerns the "sifting" decision taken in pre-tariff cases under the policy and the assessment and management of risk in cases concerning honour-based violence where there has been no admission of guilt.

Shane advised the Ministry of Defence unled in relation to a dispute concerning a complicated contract for the provision of critical IT infrastructure and services.

Shane recently appeared in an important Court of Appeal case concerning the scope of Article 8 ECHR in family reunification cases and its extra-territorial application where part of the relevant family is in a conflict zone (led by Sir James Eadie KC).

Judicial review proceedings in which the Claimant challenged (i) the refusal of the Director of Legal Aid Casework to grant her legal aid in relation to proceedings before an independent review panel concerning the exclusion of her child from school and (ii) the Lord Chancellor's Exceptional Case Funding Guidance. Following a two day rolled up hearing in May 2024, the claims were dismissed. Shane appeared unled for the Lord Chancellor.

Shane acted for the Claimant in a high profile expedited judicial review challenge to a notice issued by the UK Covid Inquiry under s.21 of the Inquiries Act 2005 for the production of a large volume of material without redactions for unambiguous irrelevance. The Divisional Court held that the notice was not ultra vires but that it was open to the Cabinet Office to challenge the notice under s.24 of the 2005 Act, providing allegedly irrelevant materials on a de bene esse basis, and that on any subsequent judicia review challenge the Court would decide questions of relevance for itself. Shane was led by Sir James Eadie KC.

Advised the Cabinet Office and other government departments (led and unled) in connection with various issues concerning the disclosure of documents and information to the UK Covid Inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005.

Significant case on the proper construction of the Civil Legal Aid (Financial Resources and Payment for Services) Regulations 2013, as to whether a depdendent child could be a member of two households simultaneously for the purposes of the application of a fixed dependent's allowance during the calculation of financial eligibility. Shane appeared unled for the Lord Chancellor.

Important constitutional case on the principle that a court order must be obeyed until and unless it is set aside or varied by the Court, or overruled by legislation, regardless of whether the order is valid, invalid, regular, irregular, or made by a court of limited or unlimited jurisdiction. Shane appeared pro bono with Raza Husain KC and Laura Dubinsky KC for Bail for Immigration Detainees (intervening). 

Advised the Home Office, Foreign Office and Treasury in connection with asset seizure and the war in Ukraine (led by Sir James Eadie KC). 

Advised the Home Office (led by Sir James Eadie KC) in connection with various legal issues relating to the application of the Windrush Scheme and Windrush Compensation Scheme, by reference to the historical rights of Commonwealth citizens under statute since 1962. 

Shane was instructed by the Secretary of State for Justice, and HMPPS, as part of a core counsel team, led by Sir James Eadie KC, to advise in relation to a variety of legal issues and potential challenges arising out of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic upon the prison service. 

In that role he has worked on (amongst other things): 

- a potential systems challenge by the Howard League for Penal Reform to the policies of HMPPS regarding the release of prisoners during the pandemic (the challenge was not issued);

- Advising HMPPS generally as to its response to the pandemic;

- R (ex p Davis) v SSJ (CO/1389/2020): a claim seeking the immediate release of a prisoner for Covid-19 related health reasons during (the claim was withdrawn);

- R (ex p Jalil) v SSJ (CO/515/2020): a claim which sought (inter alia) to challenge the approach of the SSJ to the prisoner's transfer to open conditions during the pandemic; and

- Pre-action correspondence in response to a number of further individual challenges to decisions not to release prisoners and/or to the conditions of their detention. 

Advised the Lord Chancellor in relation to a challenge to the fairness of a consultation exercise concerning the transfer of certain legal aid costs assessments from the Courts to the Legal Aid Agency. 

Advised the Lord Chancellor on setting the new personal injury discount rate following the passage of the Civil Liability Act 2018, which amended the provisions of the Damages Act 1996 (led by Sir James Eadie KC).

Advised the JCIO on whether and if so to what extent it has jurisdiction to consider complaints against former judicial office holders under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 and secondary legislation (led by Sir James Eadie KC).

Successfully opposed two expedited appeals to the Supreme Court raising challenges under Article 14 ECHR (taken with Article 8 and/or Article 1 Protocol 1) to the benefit cap legislation. The appeals also raised issues under common law and Article 3(1) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Junior counsel for the Secretary of State (as part of a team including Simon Pritchard).

Claim for declarations as to the lawfulness of the detention of aircraft under the Transport Act 2000 (and implementing regulations), at the request of EUROCONTROL, in the context of the international regime established under the EUROCONTROL Convention 1960.

Junior counsel for Ofsted in its successful appeal against a decision of the High Court ([2017] EWHC 2097) relating to the fairness of Ofsted's complaints procedures and the statutory and common law requirements of procedural fairness in relation to reports placing schools into special measures (led by James Eadie KC).

Acted as sole counsel in advising Ofsted on the impact of the Durand decision in several other cases.

Shane has advised as junior counsel, led by Sir James Eadie KC, on a number of potential reforms to public infrastructure and pensions schemes, which raise overlapping commercial and public law questions.

Advised the Export Credits Guarantee Department as to the applicable public law principles, and potential private law recourse, arising out of admitted misconduct by a previously supported UK business (led by Sir James Eadie KC).

Acting unled for the Claimant on behalf of the successor in title to Bunny Lee, a well known record producer of reggae music. The claims concern the ownership and ongoing licensing of various master recording catalogues and the alleged failure by the defendants properly to exploit the same.

Advising the surviving members of a well known rock band in relation to (i) corporate and copyright controls over the future exploitation of the band's work; and (ii) the use of a deceased member's name, likeness and biographical material for merchandising and promotional purposes; and (iii) the historic assignment of their copyrights to a joint corporate vehicle.  

Copyright dispute concerning the use of lyrics and/or a performance as part of a well known track featuring vocal samples researched from Jungle radio released in the early 1990s. Shane acts unled for the Defendant record label, publisher and artist.

Instructed by a well known pop star in connection with a series of related disputes surrounding the validity and enforceability of their management and publishing agreements (led by Ian Mill KC).

Sole counsel for the successful claimant in a high profile action against Lucasfilm for procuring breach of a contract between the Claimant, an independent film maker, and the organiser of a Star Wars fan convention. Following trial Lucasfilm were found liable in damages and were ordered to pay 75% of the Claimant's costs. 

Acted for the Defendant in a claim brought for the enforcement of alleged option rights under recording and publishing agreements (said to be worth up to £2.4 million). The case raises issues as to construction, rectification, assignment, specific performance and the applicability of foreign law (led by Andrew Green KC).

Claim alleging a contractual entitlement, alternatively a charge or constructive trust, in respect of merchandising revenue from the worldwide exploitation of rights to the Wombles. Sole counsel for the Defendant.

Acted for the Respondent in relation to an application for pre-action disclosure. The dispute arose out of a series of distribution and licensing agreements for the international distribution of short films submitted in competition for Academy Awards.

Acted for the Defendants in a claim alleging breach of restrictive covenants and duties of confidence, in the context of a wider dispute between competitors in the music industry (junior counsel to Tom Croxford KC).

Claim worth over US$700million brought by a Chinese consortium in connection with the purchase of a majority shareholding in an international sports rights business, which subsequently became insolvent. The Claimant alleges that its entry into the SPA was induced by fraud. Shane acted through the pleadings and disclosure phase (with Andrew Hunter KC and Barnaby Lowe) for the First and Tenth Defendants. Shane appeared successfully and unled at a hearing on the application of privilege to company email accounts: [2022] EWHC 2856 (Comm).

Appeared successfully as sole counsel for Oscar Piastri in a well-publicised CRB arbitration involving McLaren and Renault concerning the status of that driver's contract for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 F1 seasons. 

High profile claim brought by a well-known Premiership footballer against WADA alleging liability in negligence and defamation following the dismissal of UEFA doping proceedings against that individual. Mr Sakho (and his image rights company) is seeking career-long damages estimated at £16 million. The claim raised novel issues as regards the existence and scope of any private law duty of care owed by WADA to athletes, as well as complex issues surrounding loss of a chance and the quantification of future football earnings. Junior counsel for WADA (led by Ian Mill KC). The claim settled in 2020.

Shane was instructed to advise the FA in relation to an arbitration claim challenging the lawfulness of UEFA's ban on Russian football teams participating in certain competitions following the Russian invasion of Ukraine (led by Adam Lewis KC).

Acted for the Defendant, a professional motor racing driver in the FIA Formula E Championship and the FIA World Endurance Championship, in a dispute with his managers/funders concerning restrictive covenants in a management contract and alternative claims in unjust enrichment. Successfully obtained summary judgment in favour of the Defendant on the entire Claim. Led by Ian Mill KC.

Substantial contractual claim against a sports commercial rights holder in relation to the correct distribution of revenues, under a series of inter-related agreements, between participants in a top-flight international sporting competition (led by Andrew Hunter KC). The claim settled shortly before trial in October 2020.

Landmark decision of the Court of Appeal concerning the right of the police to charge football clubs for policing on “closed roads” during match days. Sole counsel for the intervener, the English Football League, intervening in support of the successful appellant, Ipswich Town F.C.

Acted on behalf of a well known sports star in a dispute with a former agent and manager claiming purported commission of US$20 million (led by Andrew Hunter KC).

Advised PCB in relation to their arbitration claim against the BCCI for breach of contract in relation to international cricket fixtures (junior counsel to Lord Pannick KC).

Advised a Premiership football club in relation to whether policing services provided in an area surrounding the stadium on match days are chargeable under s25 of the Police Act 1996, following the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Ipswich FC v Chief Constable of Suffolk (led by Adam Lewis KC).

Sole counsel for the Defendant in an ICC arbitration in which a top football club claimed a contractual debt of $8.22 million from one of its former sponsorship partners. 

Challenge to an FA disciplinary decision following a dispute over an on-field sanction. Sole counsel for the FA.

Junior Counsel for the FA (led by Christopher Coltart KC)

Rule K arbitration concerning the sanctioning of a club owner for acting contrary to Rule E3 in relation to the transfer of a footballer.

The Tribunal upheld the finding of liability and imposed a suspension from footballing activity of 12 months (and fine of 100,000) upon Mr Cellino.